Category: Iran

Want Living Proof that Nation-Building does not work?

Posted on1 Comment

Here you go, a video of New York Times reporter John Burns, who, by the way, was the best person covering the Iraq War.

The Video: (H/T HotAir.com)

Ed Morrissey makes a very important point:

On Iraq, it’s hard to see how Obama could have improved the situation. He followed the SOFA pact that George W. Bush negotiated with Nouri al-Maliki, and the Iraqi government made it clear they wanted us to stick to that schedule. If the Iraqis want us out entirely by the end of next year, we have little choice but to comply; to do otherwise would be a de facto reoccupation that will not fly well here at home or abroad.  However, I’d say it’s entirely likely that Baghdad will rethink that final phase and ask us to remain for logistics, training, and air and sea protection for the next several years, and then the question will be whether Obama will agree to it or insist on a full withdrawal, even if it means the collapse of the nascent democracy in Iraq.

Afghanistan is a different problem, but one with potentially the same result.  Obama owns Afghanistan more than he does Iraq, having made the decision himself to add more troops and get more aggressive, which means a failure there can’t be left on the doorstep of his predecessor.  If Obama starts withdrawing from both fronts as they deteriorate, he will at least be the man who lost Afghanistan, if not Iraq as well, just as he has to prepare to convince Americans to give him another four years as Commander-in-Chief.  For that reason, I doubt we’ll see a significant drawdown in either theater, and Obama will just have to remind the Left that they have nowhere else to go in 2012.

Ever notice how Neo-Conservatives will never say Bush screwed up with Iraq, at all? They will never admit, that there was an intelligence error — never. That is what Party loyalty does to a person.

Anyhow, some good reading about Nation-Building over at The American Conservative:

“Nation-building is the most prominent — and most important — part of the neocon doctrine,” wrote Jed Babbin in the American Spectator. “And the decision to pursue it is the principal reason that we are losing in Afghanistan, Iraq is falling apart, and the real enemy — the terror-sponsoring nations — have grown stronger.”

None of these writers can accurately be described as a budding noninterventionist. But most conservatives who opposed the Iraq War from the beginning and favored no more than a limited mission in Afghanistan can agree with them on the following: neither Islam nor foreign lands can easily be reformed by either bureaucrats or the force or the force of arms; our interventions have produced something closer to sharia states than Switzerland’s; Iran is now more powerful in the region rather than less.

There have l0ng been three main foreign-policy tendencies on the American Right: old-style conservatives who agree with Randolph Bourne that war is the health of the state and therefore favor less military intervention abroad; neoconservatives who want to preserve the United States’ global hegemony and engage in armed proselytizing for democracy; and defense-minded conservatives who believe the U.S. should strike forcefully at its enemies whenever it perceives itself, its interests, or its allies to be threatened.

Roughly speaking, these groups can be described as the Jeffersonians, the Wilsonians, and the Jacksonians. Among rank-and-file conservatives, the Jacksonians are by far the largest group. In the postwar era, the Jacksonians have tended to align with the Wilsonians. But there is no reason why that conjunction is inevitable.

With the exception of Ron Paul and some Ron Paul Republicans, the Jeffersonians have no major political figure to speak for them. Yet the popularity of the Wilsonians was always greatly exaggerated. The invasion of Iraq and the mass conservative acceptance of the Bush Doctrine were made possible by al-Qaeda’s act of mass murder on 9/11.

Throughout the 1990s, Wilsonian neoconservatives called for regime change in Iraq, but they did not succeed in rallying the grassroots Right to the cause. The conservative base tuned out the PNAC crowd. Millions of conservatives voted for Pat Buchanan, who opposed even the first war with Iraq, in the 1992 and 1996 Republican presidential primaries—even as neoconservative commentators were writing essays attempting to purge Buchanan from conservative movement.

Grassroots conservatives were repulsed by American bloodshed during our humanitarian intervention in Somalia. They opposed using our armed forces to deliver groceries to Third World countries and restoring a dubious left-wing character to power in Haiti. They objected to the bombing of Serbia and canceled their subscriptions to the Weekly Standard when that magazine sided with the Clinton administration on military action in the Balkans.

The years after 9/11 were a Jacksonian moment hijacked by neoconservatives. While most American conservatives liked the idea that the we could increase others’ freedom by defending our own against despots overseas, very few of them wanted to go to war to build schools in Iraq or promote democracy. They wanted to pay back the people who murdered their countrymen and make sure that such an attack never happened again.

They trusted that George W. Bush was the man for the job and were patient when he talked about lighting a fire in the minds of men. But ordinary conservatives nevertheless agreed with the following sentiment expressed by John Derbyshire: “What matters most is not the fire in the minds of men, which will burn at some level for as long as there are men, but the fire that results when fissionable material undergoes a fast chain reaction.”

You see the problem is that the very same people that stood behind George W. Bush and cheered him, as he charged off to war in Iraq and Afghanistan; are the same one who stand and in unison blame President Obama for any failures for the war in both Countries.  The truth is that President Obama DID inherit BOTH of these wars for President Bush and it is because of utter incompetence of the Pentagon and State Department under President Bush, not to mention the entire intelligence community, is why we are in this mess in the first place!

So, instead of being noble and honest men, and admitting that they actually made mistakes, one being electing a President that was about as Conservative, as I am damned atheist; they would rather navel graze the whole thing and try and deflect the blame onto the Democrats, as much as they possibly can.  The problem is with that little idiotic plan is this; thinking Americans, like this writer are just smarter than that, we know what happened and we know who was responsible for the actions of the President.  I am fully aware of who goaded the President into declaring war with Iraq.  I have no forgotten and neither have the American people.  This is, one of a myriad of reasons, why John McCain lost the election.  Because the American people did not want someone, who would take marching orders from the Neo-Conservatives.

So far, Obama has been showing his independence of the warmongering class in the Republican Party. Thankfully, under Michael Steele the warmongering class have been pushed aside; which is why people like William Kristol want him to resign so badly, that being because Michael Steele will not march to their orders and is expressing his own views, and not those who wish the United States to fight a perpetual war.  I commend Michael Steele for that.

Another thing I think I need to be clear on; as you know, I did post a video, that was a warning to America.  Some would look at that and say, “Are you not talking about of both sides of your mouth?” to that I would say no. That is because that video essentially validates what I have believed all along; that the notion of, “We must fight the terrorists there, so we do not have to fight them here” is idiotic at best.  That is because there are radical Islamic terrorists that are already here now! That video proves as much.  My personal issue with George W. Bush was not with fighting terrorism, which he began in Afghanistan.  He however, was goaded by the warmongering class in the Republican Party to go to war with Iraq, which, for what it is worth, is what this class of people wanted to do during the Clinton years, but was rebuffed repeatedly.  This caused, I feel, a distraction, as those who planned had this strange idea, that the invasion would be a cakewalk.  I believe it would be understood that we all know now that this was a very flawed idea.

Much of what I said above, would be considered, what I like to call, “rearview mirror quarterbacking.”  We all know this now, the problem is, where do he go from here?  The best thing that can happen is Obama follow through with his promises to follow Bush’s pull out timetable in Iraq.  We cannot continue to be the World’s police officer.  If Iraq has an upheaval over there, let them.  We did our part over there; we rooted the major player in the insurgency.  We toppled Saddam.  What happens after we have left is not our concern.  As for Afghanistan, if we can catch or kill Osama Bin Laden, fine do so.  However, if the Afghan Government and the Pakistani Government is that corrupt and does not want to be partner against the war on terror.  I say cut our losses and pull out the troops and leave.  Then send in specialized CIA assassins in there to hunt Osama Bin Laden down and kill him that way.  I just do not see the justification for our Military personnel dying for a Government that is corrupt to its core.  It just does not make any sort of sense to me at all.

Bottom Line:  President Obama should not be blame for any of the failures of any of these wars.  The President who started them should be blamed.  President Obama should continue the turnkey plan given him by Bush, and should implement a better strategy in the Afghan theater.  If the Governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan will not work with the United States on the capture or killing of Osama Bin Laden, then President should use the CIA to kill him.

Video: RedState Update on “Murfreesboro vs. Muslims”

Posted on

Redstate Update HQ

Chris Muir over at Day by Day knocks one out of ballpark!

Posted on

Via Day by Day Cartoon:

Excellent one, Chris. Keep it up!

REALITY REPORT #59 – DOJ Defines Constitutionalists as Terrorists

Posted on

The Reality Report
Restore the Republic

Judging Iraq, in the rearview mirror

Posted on

I am not much one for armchair quarter backing. However, I am speaking the non-partisan truth about a subject.

This one happens to be one, that was central to my foray in to the world of blogging.

The Iraq War.

It seems that there are some, that are really trying to put a “Tire Shine” on the Iraq War. In that process, they are basically trying to rewrite facts and basically distort realities. Which is quite common for the Neo-Right. They have been doing that since Buckley arrived on the scene many years ago.

Here is David Brooks basically either trying to recover any Conservative credentials that he might actually still have, either that or trying to suck up to President Obama….. again:

The U.S. venture into Iraq was a war, but it was also a nation-building exercise. America has spent $53 billion trying to reconstruct Iraq, the largest development effort since the Marshall Plan.

So how’s it working out?

On the economic front, there are signs of progress. It’s hard to know what role the scattershot American development projects have played, but this year Iraq will have the 12th-fastest-growing economy in the world, and it is expected to grow at a 7 percent annual clip for the next several years.

“Iraq has made substantial progress since 2003,” the International Monetary Fund reports. Inflation is reasonably stable. A budget surplus is expected by 2012. Unemployment, though still 15 percent, is down from stratospheric levels.

Oil production is back around prewar levels, and there are some who say Iraq may be able to rival Saudi production. That’s probably unrealistic, but Iraq will have a healthy oil economy, for better and for worse.

Living standards are also improving. According to the Brookings Institution’s Iraq Index, the authoritative compendium of data on this subject, 833,000 Iraqis had phones before the invasion. Now more than 1.3 million have landlines and some 20 million have cellphones. Before the invasion, 4,500 Iraqis had Internet service. Now, more than 1.7 million do.

In the most recent Gallup poll, 69 percent of Iraqis rated their personal finances positively, up from 36 percent in March 2007. Baghdad residents say the markets are vibrant again, with new electronics, clothing and even liquor stores.

[…..]

Of course, to be honest, he’ll also have to say how fragile and incomplete this success is. Iraqi material conditions are better, but the Iraqi mind has not caught up with the Iraqi opportunity.

There is still very little social trust. Iraq is the fourth-most-corrupt nation on earth, according to Transparency International’s rating system. The role of women remains surprisingly circumscribed. Iraqi politicians clearly find it very hard to compromise (though they may be no worse than American politicians in this regard).

Human capital is lagging. Most doctors left Iraq after the invasion, and it is hard to staff health clinics. The engineers left too, so American-built plants lie dormant because there is no one with the skills to run them. Schools are suffering because of a lack of teachers.

Ryan Crocker, the former ambassador, recently wrote an article in The National Interest noting that fear still pervades Iraq. Ethnic animosities are in abeyance, but they are not gone. Guns have been put in closets, but not destroyed.

If he is honest, Obama will have to balance pride with caution. He’ll have to acknowledge that the gains the U.S. is enabling may vanish if the U.S. military withdraws entirely next year. He’ll have to acknowledge that bottom-up social change requires time and patience. He’ll have to heed the advice of serious Iraq hands like Crocker, Michael O’Hanlon of Brookings and Stephen Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations, and shelve plans to withdraw completely.

Such a move may rob him of a campaign talking point. But it will safeguard an American accomplishment that has been too hard won.

Okay, that is fine. But what about the Billions of dollars that were lost in Iraq, that cannot be accounted for? Plus, since when is nation building something that is a cool thing to do? I know, as a Tax Payer, that I am not too happy about my tax dollars going to build a Country that will most likely turn against us again in the future. What brooks also fails to mention is the person that was responsible for the entire Iraq debacle, and that is President Bush.

On the subject of Nation building; Some are trying to make the comparison to to Japan and Germany. That is ludicrous on its very face.  The difference is, that the war on Japan and Germany were constitutionally declared wars, after the Empire of Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. On the other hand, Iraq never attacked us directly, and there was not a constitutionally declared war on Iraq. Just a decision by congress to authorize Bush to use Military action on Iraq, based upon a few pieces of what is now known as faulty information.  Oh, the Neo-Right will trot out some letter written to the second in command of Al-Qaeda about wanting to move against Kuwait. But there is no proof that Al-Qaeda even received the letter. Further more, Osama Bin Laden could not stand Saddam. Besides, that letter was written back in the 1990’s, after the first gulf war. So, that so-called evidence linking Saddam to 9/11 is weak, very weak.

Ed Morrissey also flirts with the subject as well, and also gets it wrong:

When the story of this war gets written, most will lay the responsibility on the President who fought it the longest, George W. Bush, and we will see a slew of analysis over the next week that insist he paid too high a price for his neoconservative adventure.  However, perhaps later, cooler minds will prevail and put this in proper perspective.  We had two choices in 2003: either remove Saddam Hussein or abandon Iraq to him.  The coalition that imposed military limits on Saddam was falling away, and the sanctions regime had become so corrupt that it made Saddam a multibillionaire in his personal fortunes.  His sons were poised to succeed him in this reign of terror.  Our twelve-year truce had been repeatedly violated by Saddam, who also attempted to assassinate a former President, and we had done nothing to  address any of it.

The follow-up nation building in which we engaged can also be debated, but again, we had little choice in the matter.  We either needed to stay in Iraq to raise up a new government and army, or watch as Iran seized control through the Mahdi Army or Iraq became a Somalia in Southwest Asia.  Either of those outcomes would have been orders of magnitude worse than our occupation over the last several years.  The management of the occupation was certainly debatable, but once we invaded, we had no other choice but to see it all the way through.

In fact, the die was cast in this case twenty years ago when the George H. W. Bush administration stood up to Saddam Hussein and demanded his withdrawal from Kuwait.  The decision to leave Saddam in place created the twelve-year Phoney War that followed, and left the choice of either surrender or victory to one of Bush’s eventual successors.  In the end, the war removed a brutal dictator who was murdering his own people at a far faster rate than the war did and over a much longer period of time and who, left to his own devices, would have beaten the Iranians to a nuclear weapon with equally disastrous implications.  The freely-elected but still dysfunctional government in Baghdad is at least a bright spot of hope in a dismal region, if we can remain committed enough to nurture it through friendship.  That is what our men and women fought and bled to create, and it’s to their honor that it exists today.

Where he gets it wrong is here:

The coalition that imposed military limits on Saddam was falling away, and the sanctions regime had become so corrupt that it made Saddam a multibillionaire in his personal fortunes.  His sons were poised to succeed him in this reign of terror.

…..

We either needed to stay in Iraq to raise up a new government and army, or watch as Iran seized control through the Mahdi Army or Iraq became a Somalia in Southwest Asia.

See the problem with all that is this here. We overthrew a dictator, and broke up that Ba’ath Party leadership. However, we created a quasi-unity Government over there, which is very fragile. We also installed, or as the Neo-Right likes to call it; voted in, another basic dictator, who is friendly to the United States. The Iraqi Government, I personally predict, will collapse once all of the American military units, of all sorts, are out of Iraq come 2011. What will happen then, is this, there will be an all out civil war in that Country. The faction there that is loyal to Iran will win, and Iraq will align itself with Iran and will then begin the process to harboring terrorists to mount attacks on Israel and ultimately the United States.

So, in closing, we did not stop Iran from invading Iraq and creating havoc in the region. We just made it a little more difficult to carry out. But know this, it will happen and someday, someone is going to say, “Why didn’t we just leave that Country alone?” and when the next huge terrorist attack happens here in America, and we discover that the terrorists trained in Iraq. We will have no one to blame — but ourselves.

BREAKING NEWS: Two Men on United Flight from Chicago Arrested on ‘Preparation of a Terrorist Attack’ charges in Amsterdam

Posted on

The system worked again, is what they will say….

Via ABC’s Brian Ross, the most awesome damned reporter on the planet:

Two men taken off a Chicago-to-Amsterdam United Airlines flight in the Netherlands have been charged by Dutch police with “preparation of a terrorist attack,” U.S. law enforcement officials tell ABC News.

U.S. officials said the two appeared to be travelling with what were termed “mock bombs” in their luggage. “This was almost certainly a dry run, a test,” said one senior law enforcement official.

Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi, left, and Hezem al Murisi

A spokesman for the Dutch public prosecutor, Ernst Koelman, confirmed the two men were arrested this morning and said “the investigation is ongoing.” He said the arrests were made “at the request of American authorities.”

[….]

In addition, officials said, al Soofi was found to be carrying $7,000 in cash and a check of his luggage found a cell phone taped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, three cell phones taped together, several watches taped together, a box cutter and three large knives. Officials said there was no indication of explosives and he and his luggage were cleared for the flight from Birmingham to Chicago O’Hare.

Instead, officials say, al Soofi was joined by the second man, Al Murisi, and boarded the United flight from Chicago to Amsterdam.

When Customs and Border officials learned al Soofi was not on the flight from Dulles to Dubai, the plane was ordered to return to the gate so his luggage could be removed. Officials said additional screening found no evidence of explosives.

The two men were detained by Dutch authorities when the United flight landed in Amsterdam, according to the officials.

AllahPundit Opines:

Basically, it sounds like this guy wanted to see just how many red flags he could send up and still be allowed to board an intercontinental flight. Answer: Quite a few, as it turns out. Which was also true of Flight 253, of course, another attempted terror attack that involved a bomber trained in … Yemen, the new number-one hot spot of international terrorism

That sounds about right; so to my readers who read this blog and travel abroad. (as opposed to traveling with broads. 😉 ) —- anyhow, seriously folks. Be careful. If you see something, anything — SAY SOMETHING! If they do not listen, demand to see their boss and keep raising hell, until someone does something! The only way that we can prevent terrorism, is to be on the look out.

There has been a lull in the activity and people are beginning to forget about the Christmas Day Terrorist attempt. That, my friends, is what terrorists do. They wait for people to do lulled back into complacency and that is when they strike. We must ALWAYS be on our guard for these bastards to strike. We are now in the global war on terror; and they want to come here to finish the job.

I may be a Moderate between Paleo-Conservative and Neo-Conservative; I may not be as far to the right as some might think that I should be. However, one thing CAN NEVER be said about this blogger —- and that is that I have my head up my arse about the global war on terrorism. I know the risks, and I am more than willing to take the hard knocks to stand against those who wish to commit Jihad against America. Further more, I am more than willing to be called a “Neo-Conservative” blogger, if that is what it means to be one, who feels that Terrorism, and terrorist activity is more than just some lowly criminal activity —- as Democrats believe it to be.  It is an act of war and should be treated as such.

In Closing: Terrorism is a real thing. If you are traveling, be aware of what is going on around you and be careful. If you see anything suspect; tell someone!

Others: CBS News, Politics Daily, New York Times, The Jawa Report, Hot Air, AMERICAN DIGEST, New York Magazine, Sister Toldjah, Gateway Pundit, Weasel Zippers, msnbc.com, NPR Topics and National Review

The Feckless Far-Right: Exhibit S for Stupidity

Posted on6 Comments

You know, I hate to be the one to mock my friends on the far-right. But this one here is a classic example of why the Republican tent is getting smaller by the day.

Over at Neo-Conservative owned NewsRealBlog, you have this big dose of lame ass tripe:

Dirty Sexy Politics by Meghan McCain is scheduled for release on August 31. But you don’t have to wait until Tuesday to see what didn’t make the final editorial cut. NewsReal Blog has obtained exclusive excerpts from the chapters rejected by Meggie Mac’s editors.

1. How Dare People Gawk At My Boobs When I Posted Them Publicly On Twitter

Meghan McCain infamously posted a picture of her, shall we say, “cups over-flowing” on Twitter the very same day that the Balloon Boy hoax went down. Presumably because, as a publicity hound extraordinaire, she couldn’t stand the focus being on some icky kid. From fly-over country, no less. As such, she tried to insert herself, and her massive ta-tas, in the mix. And then feigned indignation when people looked at the picture — that she posted publicly on the Internet. She attempted to make this a pop-up chapter in her book.

OMG! All those meany pantser, objectifiers on twitter didn’t understand that picture was code and a public service! I’m a giver! I was trying to let them know balloon boy was safely hidden, tucked away in my cleavage. Hello? I was holding a book! Everyone knows reading is hard. The purty picture on the book was code, too, obvy. Andy Warhol – a sign that the balloon boy people were just trying to steal MY 15 minutes of fame thunder.

The Andy Warhol book was relevant, seeing that Meghan McCain is well past her 15 minutes. However, sadly, the chapter was omitted because while CNN did not fact check the Balloon Boy story prior to setting the nation in a tizzy, they did fact check Meggie Mac’s ta-tas. Endlessly. Proving once again that journalism is, in fact, as dead as Janeane Garofalo’s career.

As for the Balloon Boy scam and the totally empty hot air balloon?  STILL more substantive than Meghan McCain.

Ah, yes, how supportive of a fellow Republican, than to mock her, because she’s blond, because she’s not a foreign policy wonk, because she is fat. How farking lame can you get? What is Megan McCain’s horrible offense for this sort of hatred and stupidity? Because she is a moderate. Because she is not some sort of far-right wing hatemonger idiot that’s what!

My Public question is this: Hey, Lori Ziganto and Jenn Q. Public! How’s it feel to be pimped out, by one of the biggest and most well-financed Neo-Conservatives that influenced George W. Bush to pursue his Wilsonian foreign policy? Which, by the way, is a PROGRESSIVE foreign Policy stance — which caused the Republican Party to lose the election of 2008, because Americans were weary of the idiotic foreign policy of George W. Bush —- and before you even say it, that’s not Bush derangement syndrome, that is reality folks. But yet, Conservative still flock to these idiots and then wonder why we cannot win elections.

Also, to those of you, who might not like it, because I choose not to embrace the idiotic nonsense of the far right. I have one thing to say to you: Try winning the 2010 and 2012 elections without us. It will never happen. You really want to put a another Democrat in the White House? Then keep on cranking out stupidity and hatred like this here towards Moderate Republicans. Because quite frankly, and very bluntly; I would rather vote for a Libertarian candidate and at least I would know for a fact, that this person would intend on sticking with his principles; which is honestly more than I can say for the previous Republican President, which threw his principles into the wind for the sake of supposedly keeping the bankers rich “Saving America.”

Ask the people that worked with Senator Barry Goldwater Sr.’s election campaign, how embracing the far-right idiotic nonsense worked for them. Ask the people that run George H.W. Bush campaign, when he ran for a second term, after taking us into a war, how easy it was to get reelected. But yet, Republicans just keep on flocking back to these Wilsonian idiots. I will never, ever, understand it.

Countdown to the Semite-Card playing, Wilsonian, Neo-Conservatives attacking me for being a hater in…..5…..4…..3….2

Update: Removed all references to a particular ethnic group. Because I do not want to give the Semite-Baiting twits any more ammo, than they actually need.

My Follow Conservatives: We must help this man

Posted on

My Fellow Conservatives, if we are the people that we claim to be; a group of people that does distinguish between moderate Muslims and radical Muslims who wish to destroy America. It is time to put our money, where our mouths are.

This man was a victim; A victim of someone who, although intoxicated, was caught up in the euphoria surrounding the Mosque that the backers of park51 want to build. While I feel that the backers of park51 project ought to be covering this man’s bills. I also feel that we, as Conservatives, ought to take the higher plane and ought to at least contribute to this man’s cause and help him cover his bills until he can get back to work. Because, whether we want to admit it or not; there are some on our ranks, that actually created this mess. We ought to be the honorable ones, and help this man. He is an innocent bystander in a war, between those who want to destroy America and those who wish to preserve it.

From CNN:

(CNN) — New York cab driver Ahmed Sharif cannot bring himself to talk about the young man who allegedly cut his throat and nearly killed him last week, a taxi union representative said Sunday.

“Ahmed is a strong man, but mentally he has limits,” said Bhairavi Desai of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance. “The trauma he’s experienced will last for a long time.”

Desai spent time this weekend with Sharif. She said his most pressing worry is how he’ll provide for his wife and four children — including a 10-month-old –without a job. Sharif is receiving 2/3 of his salary, about $30,000 a year, in workers’ compensation. Union members do not get health insurance or disability payments, Desai said.

“My guess is that he’ll be unable to work for at least four months,” Desai said. “He can’t even pick up his baby because of the wounds to his arms. He can’t turn his neck.”

There’s been so little money raised over the past few days for Sharif that it would “barely cover baby formula,” said Desai who, along with Sharif, held a widely publicized press conference Friday announcing the union was creating a fund for the family. The union’s website indicates how to mail a donation or give online.

There is also an address that you can send your checks and money orders to, it is:

Ahmed Sharif
c/o New York Taxi Workers Alliance
250 Fifth Avenue, Suite 310
NY, NY 10001

Further more, I do not want to hear any idiotic griping about how this place is some sort of a union or progressive organization. Who cares? They are helping this man, and that my friends is all that matters. In fact, when this posting goes live. I will be sending a small donation, along with the link to this posting. Because I do want to show, that unlike some people out there, calling themselves Conservatives, I am not ate up with hatred of those of another race. I want to show, that my battle is not against those of the Islamic Faith or those of Arab decent; but that my battle is against radical Islam and Jihad — against those who have hijacked a religion to further an agenda of hate. Sort of like these guys here.

I encourage my fellow Conservatives to for once, to put aside our feelings of mistrust; and help someone, who was quite honestly, caught in the crossfire. If we do this, we can rebuild an image that was tarnished the day this man was stabbed. Do it now; go, give and give abundantly.

Other Great Americans, who feel this is just the right thing to do: Alan Colmes’ Liberaland, New York Magazine, Suburban Guerrilla and Gawker

Quote of the Day

Posted on

The future of Iraq will hinge on its security forces after the Americans officially hand them control on September 1st. The forces are much better than they were a few years ago; buckling under pressure is no longer a certainty. Yet even their own generals say they are not really ready. The Iraqi army chief of staff wants American help until 2020. Privately, American officers agree their job is not done. Iraqi intelligence work is poor, extremist infiltrators are common, the air force is in its infancy, some commanders follow nakedly political agendas and initiative in the lower ranks is lacking, as is equipment. Prisoners are widely abused.

It is clear that Iraqis will for many years be plagued by corruption, insurgents, meddling neighbours, and their own stubborn politicians. Ending America’s “combat mission” is a gamble—and gambles can be lost.

Video: Words of the so-called “moderate Muslim” Imam of Ground Zero Mosque

Posted on

As AllahPundit would say, Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: “We tend to forget, in the West, that the United States has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hands of innocent non Muslims. You may remember that the US-led sanctions against Iraq led to the death of over half a million Iraqi children. This has been documented by the United Nations. And when Madeleine Albright, who has become a friend of mine over the last couple of years, when she was Secretary of State and was asked whether this was worth it, said it was worth it.

Pamela Geller has more, and I highly recommend that you read this one. Even I, as a Moderate Conservative, find this most interesting.

Quite bluntly, this guy has ZERO business being at, near or whatever, Ground Zero, New York or anywhere else in the United States.

But, as we know, the liberal media, will not touch this, because it really does not fit the narrative. Nor do I expect President Obama to intervene here either. Because we all know that Muslims don’t cut one another. (I mean, after all, he did have a Muslim daddy AND step-daddy…)

Update: Memeornadum Thread.

Iraq gets first unmanned bomber

Posted on

Any other time, I would not give two flips about something like this; but seeing the news that I saw last night. Um, I am a bit inclined to be a bit worried.

Last Night the New York Times reported the following:

TEHRAN — Thirty-six years after construction began under the shah, Iran finally opened its first nuclear power plant at a ceremony on Saturday.

Attended by senior officials from Iran and Russia, which helped build the plant, the ceremony marked the beginning of the transfer of low-enriched uranium fuel rods from a storage site into the plant. Officials of both countries said that Saturday’s events signified the opening, not the startup, of the plant near Bushehr, in southern Iran.

The plant itself is not controversial, because the Russians plan to provide fuel for it and to remove spent fuel that could be used to make weapons. But the opening was sure to upset United States diplomats, who had encouraged Russia to delay it as a way to add to economic sanctions imposed on Iran because of its refusal to cease enrichment of uranium at its other nuclear facilities. Although Iran denies that it is using its civilian nuclear program to mask a plan to build a bomb, many Western countries are dubious.

Which is not exactly true. If this news source can be trusted; Haartz is reporting the following:

Iran will continue to enrich its own uranium, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told the country’s semi-official Fars news agency on Saturday, hours after Russian nuclear fuel began to be inserted into Iran’s first nuclear reactor.

Iranian and Russian engineers began the weeklong operation to load uranium fuel into the Bushehr nuclear power plant, a major milestone as Tehran forges ahead with its atomic program despite U.N. sanctions.

Last week, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters the United States felt that the fact that the Bushehr reactor would operate solely on Russian fuel proved that “underscores that Iran does not need its own enrichment capability if its intentions, as it states, are for a peaceful nuclear program.”

Gibbs added that the Bushehr plant proved “to the world that, if the Iranians are sincere in a peaceful program, their needs can be met without undertaking its own enrichment program, which call into question its motives.

Having made that point; I want to direct your attention to this little gem, which popped into my RSS this morning.

This comes via AP, which comes to me via the Daily Caller:

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Sunday inaugurated the country’s first domestically-built, long-range, unmanned bomber aircraft, calling it an “ambassador of death” to Iran’s enemies.

Speaking to a group of officials Ahmadinejad said, “The jet, as well as being an ambassador of death for the enemies of humanity, has a main message of peace and friendship.”

The goal of the aircraft is to “keep the enemy paralyzed in its bases,” he said, adding that the jet is for deterrence and defensive purposes.

The president championed the country’s military self-sufficiency program, and said it will continue “until the enemies of humanity lose hope of ever attacking the Iranian nation.”

The 4-meter-long unmanned plane, dubbed the Karrar or striker in Farsi, was inaugurated on the national day for the country’s defense industry in a ceremony aired live on state TV.

No details were provided on the craft’s capabilities.

Iran has been producing its own light, unmanned surveillance aircraft since the late 1980s.

The ceremony came a day after Iran began to fuel its first nuclear power reactor, with the help of Russia, amid international concerns over the possibility of a military dimension to its nuclear program.

Iran insists it is only interested in generating electricity.

Call me overly paranoid, But I don’t quite believe that Iran is just using that plant for generating electricity. I mean, a plant opens one day; and nobody is quite sure what fuel that they will be using. The next very next day, Iran debuts a unmanned drone, which can drop a bomb? Sorry, but I find that just a bit unnerving. Hopefully, someone at the State Department will see the story and go, “um, Barry?” and let the President know about this. However, I do not expect that the President will be inclined to do anything about it. I mean, after all, we did just get out of Iraq; and we are still very busy with Afghanistan as well.

It could very well be, that this drone is to basically taunt and a feeble attempt to put fear into Israel. However, I am inclined to believe that it will have just the opposite effect. Either way, this should be an interesting story to follow.

I just hope that the President, his Administration and our State Department are taking this as seriously, as they should be.

Further more, I do not expect the liberal media to get into any sort of huff about this either; as they do not see the threat of Iran, like those of us, who know what idiot leader of that Country is capable of; plainly, the man is crazy and is a Jew hater and there is no telling what he might use that drone for. If I were Israel, I would be preparing for war. Because it is quite obvious that this is what Iran wants.

Update: Now a Memeorandum Thread.